Stephen Strange: Doctor Strange Appreciation 2021

[Clea]

I think it was PURELY a reference to remind folks that the Multiverse of Madness is coming out next year. But even to MENTION magic in such a grounded and somewhat political/military type series goes to show how much Disney cares about the magical component of the MCU. I also thought it was a way to re-introduce the snarky quippiness that the MCU is well-known for. I thought the Hobbit joke was hilarious. I totally laughed out loud at that one (but the author of this article is growing weary of the banter in Marvel movies these days):

https://www.theringer.com/2021/3/31/...winter-soldier

..SNIP...

I guess Strange never travelled much to the past for his adventures. I would have liked to see him get knee-deep into some Sword in the Stone type escapades. But you're right, his personality is definitely rooted in the modern world. But I'm pretty sure skirt-chasing was popular centuries ago too.

Yeah, you're right. Personal life stories just seem to THRIVE on the small screen in a way they can't in the movies. But has Strange ever had a "Vision" and/or "Demon in a Bottle" type story in his comic book past? Like strictly domestic and/or battling his own personal demons kind of things? If that's the case, I think Cumberbatch is MORE than capable of doing something like that for television. Doctor Strange was surprisingly grounded for such a trippy film. I wish his origin story could have been expanded on more in his debut, however. I would have absolutely cut out the romance in that film and focused more on that. I really liked Doctor Strange's first film, but even I acknowledge that in some ways it's Iron Man with magic.

And although most people probably don't pay much attention to this, I really REALLY appreciate the intricate way Strange and Wanda MOVE their hands to use magic. I even have read that Disney hired choreographers to help Cumberbatch and Olsen with their hand movements, and it just makes magic users look SO cool when they perform magical acts.

That is an insightful article. The author is correct that Marvel leans heavily on buddy-buddy humor and wise-cracking banter in its storytelling style. That's true in the comics and even more so in the movies. DC characters tend to be more serious. The MCU characters might feel a bit more like real adults if they didn't always crack jokes ever other line, and if they were able to show that even the heroes aren't all automatically friends. For example Doctor Strange should not be dropping jokes at the same rate and style as Peter Parker. Strange is a much more serious character. He's more of a loner than someone who's going to join groups and pal around.

Strange has traveled around in other dimensions, and through time, and to outer space, but he's mainly modern earth based because he is the modern protector of the contemporary earth dimension. They could always put him into a fantasy world setting for a particular story, but he's not Gandalf. That bit of dialogue you quoted above was really more to show Bucky's age -- he was around to read the Hobbit when it was just published, and also to add a bit more flavor to Bucky's own personality: he liked reading fun fantasy stories back before he was turned into an assassin, so the dark, tortured guy we see now used to be much more lighthearted and normal back in the day. Maybe that aspect of him is still in him and we'll see more of it over time. Who knows. Marvel likes to have little call-outs and hooks between their movies and tv shows, so maybe in an upcoming film, Bucky or Sam will be a scene with Strange and one of them will call him Gandalf.

As for Strange battling personal demons...Yes, that was a running refrain in the classic Strange series. His 'demons' were loneliness and a tendency to brood over the fact that he had to sacrifice his personal life because of his duty, to the point where he would not even share himself 100% with those closest to him (Clea, Wong, others).

[Albert1981]

That is an insightful article. The author is correct that Marvel leans heavily on buddy-buddy humor and wise-cracking banter in its storytelling style. That's true in the comics and even more so in the movies. DC characters tend to be more serious. The MCU characters might feel a bit more like real adults if they didn't always crack jokes ever other line, and if they were able to show that even the heroes aren't all automatically friends. For example Doctor Strange should not be dropping jokes at the same rate and style as Peter Parker. Strange is a much more serious character. He's more of a loner than someone who's going to join groups and pal around.

Strange has traveled around in other dimensions, and through time, and to outer space, but he's mainly modern earth based because he is the modern protector of the contemporary earth dimension. They could always put him into a fantasy world setting for a particular story, but he's not Gandalf. That bit of dialogue you quoted above was really more to show Bucky's age -- he was around to read the Hobbit when it was just published, and also to add a bit more flavor to Bucky's own personality: he liked reading fun fantasy stories back before he was turned into an assassin, so the dark, tortured guy we see now used to be much more lighthearted and normal back in the day. Maybe that aspect of him is still in him and we'll see more of it over time. Who knows. Marvel likes to have little call-outs and hooks between their movies and tv shows, so maybe in an upcoming film, Bucky or Sam will be a scene with Strange and one of them will call him Gandalf.

As for Strange battling personal demons...Yes, that was a running refrain in the classic Strange series. His 'demons' were loneliness and a tendency to brood over the fact that he had to sacrifice his personal life because of his duty, to the point where he would not even share himself 100% with those closest to him (Clea, Wong, others).

Yeah, DC characters do tend to be more serious. I actually read more DC than Marvel, but I like the MCU so much because it IS so light-hearted and fun. Maybe I'm just a sucker for some mindless entertainment. I mostly watch documentaries and read books, so I don't really want to be "challenged" by superhero fare. You did mention earlier how much you despised how grimdark Marvel Comics got earlier this century. I kinda feel the family-friendly Disney MCU formula is a response to that. And I'm enjoying myself a lot. BUT, I do feel that there are a LOT of quips in MCU movies and shows. Like with each successive movie, more characters suddenly seemed to want to be comedians. It's still really weird to me that Strange sometimes talks like Ant-Man, Spider-Man, Star-Lord, post-Ragnarok Thor, and Iron Man. I mean, maybe Marvel Studios thought his personality in the comic books in the olden days was too boring for contemporary audiences, and I have to admit, they're probably right about that. I think he got popular after Infinity War partly because he called Stark a douchebag. So I say stick with the formula.

I definitely agree with your comments about Bucky. Stan's actually a pretty funny guy. He never showed his humorous side in previous movies much. I welcome the personality makeover. At some point, Sam has to gift Bucky a copy of Lord of the Rings, and Barnes just goes wide-eyed. "THERE'S MORE?!" And then his head explodes when he discovers the Silmarillion. But I wouldn't mind Strange being called Gandalf. The MCU has already referenced the LOTR before.

I was hoping Strange would have had a specific story arc in the comic books which could be adapted for a television show. I know Armor Wars is considered one of Iron Man's most famous ones, and now Disney is having War Machine star in its adaptation of it. I thought maybe Stephen could have had a notable one too. I know Triumph and Torment was quite well-received back in the day, but I just got this feeling that Marvel Studios would be EXTREMELY reluctant to bring in Mephisto into the MCU because of his "Devil-like" nature.

[Clea]

...SNIP...

I was hoping Strange would have had a specific story arc in the comic books which could be adapted for a television show. I know Armor Wars is considered one of Iron Man's most famous ones, and now Disney is having War Machine star in its adaptation of it. I thought maybe Stephen could have had a notable one too. I know Triumph and Torment was quite well-received back in the day, but I just got this feeling that Marvel Studios would be EXTREMELY reluctant to bring in Mephisto into the MCU because of his "Devil-like" nature.

Strange's stories, abilities, and foes tend to be much too big, psychedelic, and esoteric for tv. He's a cinematic character. IMO, he's best adapted to film, not tv.

[Clea]

Check out this auction for a lovely original Doctor Strange art by Chris Bachelo, with a poem Neil Gaiman. Current bid, $12,300 with 5 days to go.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/CHRIS-BACHA...M/303939966228

[Albert1981]

Strange's stories, abilities, and foes tend to be much too big, psychedelic, and esoteric for tv. He's a cinematic character. IMO, he's best adapted to film, not tv.

Do you think Strange would have been a beatnik and/or a folkie like character if he was introduced a decade earlier than he was? To me, learning about Strange is definitely an acquired taste. My preferences in music are more grounded: I enjoy country, blues, gospel, folk, jazz and even Latin music. Strange sort of represents progressive rock to me (in comic book form). Whereas Stark represents classic rock (in comic book form). I kind of don't understand Strange. For me it's like a fan of Aerosmith trying to get into Rush.

[DigiCom]

Do you think Strange would have been a beatnik and/or a folkie like character if he was introduced a decade earlier than he was? To me, learning about Strange is definitely an acquired taste. My preferences in music are more grounded: I enjoy country, blues, gospel, folk, jazz and even Latin music. Strange sort of represents progressive rock to me (in comic book form). Whereas Stark represents classic rock (in comic book form). I kind of don't understand Strange. For me it's like a fan of Aerosmith wanting to get into Rush.

Nah, Stephen comes from an older tradition of Orientalism, in particular that of the Victorian era. Indeed, in his earliest tales (before Ditko penned his origin) he didn't even look white. Well...there is some debate as to what race he was supposed to be, but there's quite a divide between this:



and this:

[Clea]

Do you think Strange would have been a beatnik and/or a folkie like character if he was introduced a decade earlier than he was? To me, learning about Strange is definitely an acquired taste. My preferences in music are more grounded: I enjoy country, blues, gospel, folk, jazz and even Latin music. Strange sort of represents progressive rock to me (in comic book form). Whereas Stark represents classic rock (in comic book form). I kind of don't understand Strange. For me it's like a fan of Aerosmith wanting to get into Rush.

No, I don't think so. They would still have introduced him with the same personality and background. He was drawn from the classic trope of the lone, brooding, powerful magician alone in his spooky tower. (Not to mention tons of pulp fiction and early cinema.) Other magic users could be introduced with a more laid back, folksie, or counter-culture sort of personality. One of the basic points about Strange though, is that he isn't counter culture. He was a self-satisfied, well to do guy who lived quite comfortably. He got yanked out of that lifestyle and retrained to see reality in a whole new way. They way they updated the character in the movie fit very well.

If you want to associate Strange with music, maybe check out this cover of Pink Floyd's 'A Saucerful of Secrets':
https://www.reddit.com/r/pinkfloyd/c...the_cover_art/
https://www.denofgeek.com/comics/the...yd-connection/

[Albert1981]

Nah, Stephen comes from an older tradition of Orientalism, in particular that of the Victorian era. Indeed, in his earliest tales (before Ditko penned his origin) he didn't even look white. Well...there is some debate as to what race he was supposed to be, but there's quite a divide between this:



and this:

So now I have to consult the works of Edward W. Said to understand Strange better? Good Lord!

[DigiCom]

So now I have to consult the works of Edward W. Said to understand Strange better? Good Lord!

Even tighter... the first image I posted was from Strange Tales #110.

Five issues later, he looked like this:

[Albert1981]

No, I don't think so. They would still have introduced him with the same personality and background. He was drawn from the classic trope of the lone, brooding, powerful magician alone in his spooky tower. (Not to mention tons of pulp fiction and early cinema.) Other magic users could be introduced with a more laid back, folksie, or counter-culture sort of personality. One of the basic points about Strange though, is that he isn't counter culture. He was a self-satisfied, well to do guy who lived quite comfortably. He got yanked out of that lifestyle and retrained to see reality in a whole new way. They way they updated the character in the movie fit very well.

If you want to associate Strange with music, maybe check out this cover of Pink Floyd's 'A Saucerful of Secrets':
https://www.reddit.com/r/pinkfloyd/c...the_cover_art/
https://www.denofgeek.com/comics/the...yd-connection/

I KNEW there was a connection between Pink Floyd and Strange. Now you have confirmed it for me. Thank you! I'm not even sure if Strange would have gained as much popularity as he did if he wasn't introduced during that weird counter-culture era. He was TAILOR MADE for that period of time. But I don't think Strange would work as a Beatnik. Can't imagine him hanging out with Allen Ginsberg. BUT I can ABSOLUTELY see him being friends with Timothy Leary.

[Albert1981]

Even tighter... the first image I posted was from Strange Tales #110.

Five issues later, he looked like this:

Wow. He sure was an ******* back in the day. Cumberbatch's version was less of a jerk than he was. I like Strange as a noble person...with a roguish eye for the laydeez.

[Albert1981]

None of Strange's Order uses energy blasts, right? Their powers are knowledge-based and are more mystic? Because the way Strange uses his powers makes magic VERY interesting to me. I literally had ZERO interest in magical characters in live-action fiction because their battles often ended up being lightning shows. But after seeing Stephen do his thing in his first movie and in Infinity War, I totally became a huge fan of his. I WAS a bit disappointed he didn't meet colorful Vision in WandaVision though. I find aspects of their personalities to be similar (in particular when it comes to their curiosity and love of knowledge). I doubt he would have anything in common with Spectral Vision, though.

[Clea]

None of Strange's Order uses energy blasts, right? Their powers are knowledge-based and are more mystic? Because the way Strange uses his powers makes magic VERY interesting to me. I literally had ZERO interest in magical characters in live-action fiction because their battles often ended up being lightning shows. But after seeing Stephen do his thing in his first movie and in Infinity War, I totally became a huge fan of his. I WAS a bit disappointed he didn't meet colorful Vision in WandaVision though. I find aspects of their personalities to be similar (in particular when it comes to their curiosity and love of knowledge). I doubt he would have anything in common with Spectral Vision, though.

Define 'energy blast.' They frequently blast magical energy at their opponents. When you see this effect in the MCU, it ends up looking like the same as the sort of quasi-laser beam stuff the superheroes do.

[Albert1981]

Define 'energy blast.' They frequently blast magical energy at their opponents. When you see this effect in the MCU, it ends up looking like the same as the sort of quasi-laser beam stuff the superheroes do.

I'm not too entirely sure what energy blasts are myself. I just read comments online describing how witches and sorcerers use "energy blasts" to fight their opponents. Like what's the difference between Agatha's "energy blasts" and Vision's "energy blasts"? I mean their COLORS are different, but they're still "lasers" to me.

[Clea]

I'm not too entirely sure what energy blasts are myself. I just read comments online describing how witches and sorcerers use "energy blasts" to fight their opponents. Like what's the difference between Agatha's "energy blasts" and Vision's "energy blasts"? I mean their COLORS are different, but they're still "lasers" to me.

Agatha would bundle magical energy that she's learned how to control. Same for other magic users. It would be the same sort of energy that they draw on to perform spells, teleportation, etc. It could be energy drawn from the magic user themself, nature/earth magic, deity magic, energy drawn from the major magical beings and powers, energy from other dimensions, etc. It would all depend on the knowledge, skill, and experience of the magic user. They'd all have different sources and levels of energy that they could wield.

The lasers and photon blasts and whatever it is that the non-magical users wield are supposedly science based, even if it's just some sort of made up Marvel 'science.' On the page or on the screen though, it's hard to distinguish between a science based energy blast and a magic-based blast. Just go with it. If it's Strange, you know it's a magic energy blast. If it's the Falcon, it's science-based. If it's Dr. Doom... well then you need more context because he's an adept sorcerer and a genius scientist so he can pick and choose what he wants to do.